Now, I was gonna stay out of this, as I don't believe in "piling on", butI believe your quote was directed at me.
I challenge you to find a post where I advocate using nuclear weapons against anyone in the Middle East.
Put up, or STFU.
Pierre Trudeau, an Anti-Semite and Admirer of Fascism
- Thread starter china
- Start date
Now, I was gonna stay out of this, as I don't believe in "piling on", butI believe your quote was directed at me.
I challenge you to find a post where I advocate using nuclear weapons against anyone in the Middle East.
Put up, or STFU.
Trudeau was a poor fascist,
Fascist tend to respect class structure and go the extra step to ensure that workers have the means to subsistence. Trudeau's crapping on the economy and bringing down the living standard was the opposite of that end.
Fascist tend to respect class structure and go the extra step to ensure that workers have the means to subsistence. Trudeau's crapping on the economy and bringing down the living standard was the opposite of that end.
It didn't have something to do with your crown in Prussia did it ... or the bathtub commander guy
He's an "odd duck" alright but I can't place him other than to say he's not Harley Hunny. His avatar picture kind of makes me think he may have a connection to Neo Nazis. (Not that that is any worse than defending Trudeau) :lol:
Okay, semantics, you could also call it an ideology or form of governance, but any system or whatever you may wish to call it requires other systems or policies to make them work, just as capitalism cannot work in a vacuum as was tried in Russia after the fall of the Soviet empire. Fascism and socialism require government control over the means of production and ultimately control over the people, or it will not work. Capitalism requires the rule of law and a government willing to enforce it, or it will not work, as we've witnessed in post Soviet Russia, and more recently Wall Street.
Extremely right of what? After the war Satlin propagated that differentiation to distance his form of governance from that of Hitler when the only difference was that Stalin was an equal opportunity despot.
Socialism and Marxism theorizes that capital should be freely available to the masses - but how often do you encounter an idiot on the street? I would be extremely worried about the idea of letting a feeble-minded individual, whose sole aspirations in life are sex and football, have access to capital.
These experiments were tried during the earliest years of the Soviet Union and it didn't take long for them to decide that government intervention was necessary.
Just like no one anymore practices "pure capitalism", because corporations that are not monitored enough are eventually bound to make the same mistakes as individuals
I.e. considered the de-regulation of the U.S. mortage market by Freddie Mac.
However, your description of economic fascism isn't correct. Fascist Governments have no intention in organizing production (no doubt the reason why the Italians and Germans had better access to consumer goods than the Soviets ever did) but maintaining the class structure and ensuring that workers can attain the means of subsistence.
But that ideology had its crappier sides, namely the notion of a natural aristocracy (which even some American revolutionists in 1776 had believed in), Autarky (which would have always led to war), et al (I wouldn't mention xenophobia as a characteristic of Fascism as Mussolini's Italy wasn't Anti-Semitic and there have been Anti-Semitic Communist parties).
Last edited:
The problem with Marxism and socialism is giving capital freely to the feeble minded without them having to earn it, taken from those who do. There are plenty of feeble minded who have access to capital otherwise, just look at Hollywood. And people give it freely to them, but I digress.
There are a lot of "isms" and not all fit neatly into pidgeon holes, nor are they easily generalized. While fascist governments have no intention in organizing production, it is their intention to control it. Fascism is often referred to as middle class socialism as it still allows workers to enjoy some of the fruits of their labours. The state still dictates who produces what and how much, (that may sound familiar if you deal with marketing boards). It is still a state controlled economy which limits competition and rewards those in its favour. Marxism, socialism, fascism, and all other statisms can be made to look good on paper, and there is a good argument in their favour. The problem is that they are require social and economical engineering. Engineers like predictable results, human nature doesn't allow for that. In the end the state has to become more dictatorial to achieve its aim. This is a fatal flaw, to both the system and to many that fall victim to it.
As is what eventually happens with fascism.
Indeed the capitalism practiced today may cause a dangerous shift to something that has been tried and has failed miserably in the past. No economic system can exist entirely on its own. Both socialism and fascism require government control in varying degrees to exist simply because they are a product of government. Capitalism is the product of a free market, or a public system. "Pure capitalism" will in fact result in what we are experiencing now. Human nature being what it is ensures that. Capitalism requres the rule of law, just the same as a hockey game. Government control also has to be limited by the rule of law, so everyone knows the rules before the puck is dropped. Most of the world fell victim to the relaxing of, or the non enforcement of the rule of law. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how that happened, (though pundits and policy makers would have you believe so), greed is a powerful motivator. However, greed in a socialist or fascist system usually has a more deadly effect.
Sorry, your quotes are a bit chopped up, I was in the middle of replying but was called away and you must have edited your post in the meantime. Anyway, ideologies are almost always the product of a small number of zealots who consider themselves progressive, and who doesn't like that word, (have your doctor tell you about something progressive in your test reults), and there are always victims. They want to change or expedite the natural order of things, resistance is normally dealt with harshly. What the catalyst is depends on the zeitgeist, it could be anti semitism, anti white, anti rich, anti intellectual, anti capitalist, anti American, whatever works to whip up a religous fervour amongst their followers. They will always find a foe and provide justification for their cause..
JLM
I only post the articles in this forum ;you guys are making it a "thread".
....whatever is of your own making ....is always realistic .
This thread is a troll thread because the very first post was a completely one-sided affair. That's not to say Trudeau was the complete opposite of the OPs synopsis, but I'm pretty sure a more fair and balanced assessment wouldn't have led us into trailer trash vs. the educated world.
Well, maybe you shouldn't try debating things with the "Educated world". :roll:
Nazism is and has at its core -
Hatred meaning killing of Jews - By assembly line - as demonstrated in WW2
That also includes so called Sub Humans - Slavs, Homosexuals, Communists and on and on.
Yet you have the audacity to state you hate Neo -Nazi's, yet you have made statements about and recommending mass killing of Jews - In Israel to be specific.
To me - You are not a Neo-Nazi - You meet the original standard.
I would rate you lower than a Troll.